So, that happened.
The debate between Matt Binder (from the Majority Report) and Paul Elam (from A Pile of Money for Paul Elam) went off yesterday. I can’t say it went off without a hitch, because it was actually quite hitch-full. Indeed, it was kind of a disaster — at least for one Paul Elam.
Paul’s the one who wanted the debate. He chose the topic, he chose the format, he controlled the venue. And he lost the debate rather spectacularly, grimly reading a succession of prepared statements while Binder shot down his arguments with common-sensical one-lines and raised issues that Elam didn’t or couldn’t address.
Binder rattled Elam early by presenting him with an unattributed quote that sounded virtually identical to Elliot Rodger’s misogynistic rants and which Elam dismissed as something that no MRA would ever say; Binder then revealed that it was a quote from Stefan Molyneux, the MRA “philosopher” who was one of the featured speakers at AVFM’s recent conference. (Indeed, it was a quote that I highlighted in my first Misogyny Theater videos on Mr. M.)
Then, after Elam read off a list of all the various women who have associated themselves in some way with AVFM, Binder knocked the wind out of him by asking, quite simply, so what?
The most surreal moment, in a debate full of surreal moments, came 39 minutes into the debate. Binder had spent much of his previous two segments discussing an assortment of issues that the Men’s Rights movement largely ignores, even though they primarily affect men, and men of color in particular — from stop and frisk policies in major cities to the deaths of American soldiers in wars overseas.
But instead of answering Binder’s question –why hasn’t the Men’s Rights movement actually tried to do something about these problems? — Elam instead read his prepared “closing statement,” responding not to anything Binder had argued but to the arguments Elam, writing the statement before the debate, had assumed he would make.
And so, after hearing Binder passionately argue that the MRM needs to fight for the rights of men in prison and for the lives of men sent to fight and possibly die in wars, we heard Elam beating away on a straw man, declaring — after calling him a bigot — that Binder
has been led to believe, quite falsely, that gender justice mandates the summary rejection of all men’s problems in favor of a view that can only see men as the problem.
The debate, such as it was, lurched to its conclusion in an assortment of miscues and technical glitches a few minutes later. Dean Esmay, the incompetent and often ineffectual “moderator” of the debate, rocking back and forth on his chair in a darkened room, eyes mostly closed, plaintively asked Binder to send him “that particular story” on stop and frisk in New York city that Binder had referred to earlier in the debate. Esmay, defensive and exasperated, explained that
we are an all-volunteer organization and we don’t see every story. I’d like to see that story from Matt, please do send it to me.
Binder, incredulous, pointed out that stop and frisk has been in the headlines for years, as Esmay, visible in a small box at the bottom of the screen, rubbed his head as though he were developing a migraine. Esmay repeated his request, saying that
we cover a lot of stories; I’m just asking for you to send me that.
There were then a few uncomfortable moments as Esmay and Elam tried to figure out how to close down the Google Hangout that was hosting the debate.
Esmay: “Are we off?”
Binder: “Still says ‘live’ for me.”
Esmay: “Paul?”
Elam: “Yeah, I’m still having problem with the button.”
Esmay laughs.
Elam: “Isn’t that wonderful?”
Long silence. Esmay rocks back and forth on his chair.
Esmay: “Just close the window.”
A few moments later, he did.
I think we may need to have another AVFM graphics contest, incorporating what I think should be AVFM’s new slogans:
“I’m still having problem with the button.”
“We are an all-volunteer organization and we don’t see every story.”
A Voice for Men is clearly not ready for its closeup.
@ Skye
Sure, we can have tea and biscuits and talk about how our failure to conform to socially acceptable models of female desire is also oppressing the misters, somehow, if you just turn sideways and squint hard enough.
Though just out of curiosity since we have a decent number of women here, how many of you do go for the fitness magazine cover model look? And of those who do, how many go for that look exclusively, ie. would refuse to even consider dating a man who didn’t have a six-pack?
Oh shit yeah! And later, too – pretty much until pantaloons and then trousers replaced breeches and stockings. I wish I could remember the details, but there’s a story of a nobleman (Spanish? Italian?) getting very huffy when the queen (French?) teased him that his lovely calves were the result of padding, and marching into her rooms bare-legged to prove it was all natural.
@WWTH, or glam rock in general, presumably!
@Unimaginative, that photo reminds me of this stunning painting.
(Sorry to exclude gay male Mammotheers, but I think we’re pretty much stuck in heteronormative town when it comes to this particular manosphere obsession.)
I’m also not usually into buff guys although there are exceptions. I am not so attracted to uniforms either. I guess I’m also womaning wrong.
It’s really said how trolls think we live in a high school movie. If you’re not in high school anymore you should really stop thinking about jocks and cheerleaders all the time.
Throwing out some Balkan pride, in honor of Mr. FM:
The traditional, very fancy but not terribly functional (by today’s standards) sixteenth century Croatian soldier’s uniform.
I also learned that those red uniform cravats are the precursor of the modern men’s necktie. Next time Mr. FM complains about wearing a tie, I can tell him that heritage really demands a tasseled red cravat instead.
I’ve never dated or slept with a muscly guy. I wouldn’t necessarily be against it; I’ve given almost every other body type a go and have enjoyed them all. But honestly I think that a body-builder type would be likely to have very different ideas for how to spend their free time than I would, so I don’t think they’d like me nor I them.
I didn’t go to a US high school – is that really how things are when you’re stuck in one, or is that also just a movie trope?
(Out of my high school group of friends none liked the fitness model look, we all used to bond over our love of skinny boys in eyeliner.)
I dated one pretty buffed guy, when I was 18, but we didn’t have much in common so it didn’t last long. He found my interest in politics and artsy stuff confusing and I found him boring and not much fun to talk to – a bad match all around, I’d say.
I don’t like the look of muscly guys. I hate the ones that are so “ripped” that I can see their veins and they look like they have had their skin removed. They remind me of those plastic anatomical models.
Although I do like Dwayne Johnson, but not when he looks “ripped”.
Aren’t the models on those fitness magazines doing stuff like withholding liquid for 24 hours ahead of the photo shoots? Plus other dietary stuff happens too, just like for the competitions. Even the guys in those magazines don’t normally look like that.
I think it’s primarily a movie trope. I mean the football players and cheerleaders are often popular, but they aren’t the only popular ones and the certainly aren’t the only ones other students have crushes on or getting in relationships.
pallygirl, this page says steam blocking can be done for acrylic, if you don’t touch the fabric:
http://beadknitter.blogspot.com.au/2009/03/you-can-block-acrylic.html
Hope that helps! 🙁
I think they would have been, Skye. The standing collars, especially the millstone ruffs, had to be starched, and they were all supported on very high, stiff (as in several layers of cardboard inside) collars on the doublets – they came right up under the chin. Even the falling lace bands, the classic cavalier look, were held up that way. I have no end of FASHION RAGE when films have men with bare necks above their collars in that period: it just didn’t happen. Those things sat right up under the chin.
The interesting part is that comfort really doesn’t seem to have been a consideration so much, then. It was all the look.
Irony, from much later: a dude in the 1850s whining that women are soooo lucky, their clothes are sooo comfortable and men’s are so awful and uncomfortable and inconvenient. I’ll dig the fashion book out if anyone’s interested in reading him verbatim.
I suspect it’s also why Mr K has a permanent aversion to wearing high collars of any sort! Forty years wearing ’em was quite enough, it seems.
Oooh oooh can I join in the tea and biscuits party in the Failed Woman corner?
I like *some* uniforms on *some* men – usually older uniforms, so we’re looking at paintings anyway.
And I hate, hate, hate the body-builder buff look. To me all that extra muscle doesn’t make me think “Dude’s interested in how he looks/being fit,” it makes me wonder “Who the fuck are you planning to use all that strength and aggression on?” – a visceral and probably 99.9% of the time inaccurate reaction, but I just find that look threatening, as well as totally unappealing.
I guess guys who think that that look is a. real and how those men look all the time and b. what all women want are suffering from a male variation on the social programming that drives some women to feel like if they don’t look like a Vogue cover model nobody will ever love them. It has to suck to feel that way, but I’m not sure why they’re blaming feminists rather than, say, the media.
I went to a US high school but it was an academic magnet school with no sports, so… I don’t know! I mean we definitely had cliques but most people were friends with lots of different sorts of people, so there was a lot of group overlap. The drama group was also largely the same group that was in all the AP classes (advanced placement). They were also the popular group. Some but not all of them were in band or choir as well. I was in the nerdy group but also did some drama and some AP and some choir. There were some kids I would consider in the popular group who didn’t do drama or AP. There was also the arty group, which I was friends with despite my not being particularly arty. There was a lot of arty and nerd overlap. There were different nerdy groups too; the one I was in was nerdy in more non-academic ways, so anime and video games, whereas there were other groups that were academic-nerd focused, like being super into science or math, and may be in chess club. But then you start to loop back around to the drama group, who were also in those AP science and math groups.
So yeah, in my experience, there are groups but they all overlap heavily, and most people are members of more than one group. So not at all like a high school movie.
The jocks and cheerleaders were not different than other kids at my school. One year the head cheerleader was fat and black. Pretty much the opposite of movie head cheerleaders.
I did go to a large and diverse school in a liberal city though. There was a group for pretty much everyone to fit into and there wasn’t a specific group that was the one and only cool clique that ran the school.
I think it depends on the school but I doubt it’s ever as exaggerated as movies. That’s why it’s so weird that every sad boner troll seems to think we live in a high school movie.
Flying Mouse – yes, the very word cravat is thought to derive from Croat! There are various stories about how it was introduced, whether from Croat mercenaries during the Thirty Years’ War, or soldiers generally tying their falling bands (think Van Dyck collars) in front with ribbons, for convenience, or a probably apocryphal tale of Prince Rupert tying a handkerchief around his neck in lieu of a collar, during the Civil War.
The frogging on those guys’ uniforms was a huge fashion thing, too. It came from Hungarian dress, iirc, and spread all over in the late 17th century.
@ Kittehs
You know, I think part of the reason that look does nothing for me on a sexual level may be that I had a family friend growing up who looked like that (he played college football at a pretty high level), and he was like a big brother to me, so I don’t find men who look that way threatening at all, but they do remind me of the guy who was like a brother to me as a kid, which isn’t really a mental/emotional association that prompts the desire for sexytimes.
Re: muscular men and my ladyfeels – I like a good set of broad shoulders personally. They can be attached to a guy who’s square and kinda chubby, or a guy with the chiseled body of a fitness model. So I’m fine with a muscular physique, but it’s definitely not something I seek out in a partner.
The only time I ever really liked a man in uniform was when Mr. FM wore them regularly. And TBH, it was probably because the starched shirts on his class B’s looked really good on his shoulders. 😉
I like broad shoulders best on men who’re kind of skinny and lanky overall, and have no particular desire for them to lead down to an abdomen that you could cut diamonds on. Once again I seem to be doing womaning wrong.
A guy whose arms are so muscly he can’t put them down at his sides is so unattractive to me. I’m pretty flexible when it comes to body type and I’ve been with a variety but that’s a deal breaker.
cassandra – sort of like kilts, yes? Familial feeling excluding potential sexiness of the look. ::nods::
That makes sense. I don’t like mustaches on men and my dad has had one my whole life.
@ Kittehs
Yeah, if someone reminds me of a family member on a physical level that does seem to shut down my libido pretty fast. I guess that would probably confuse the manosphere guys too.
@WWTH
Me too, on the mustaches, especially if it’s just a mustache with no beard.
WWTH – that makes me think of this sort of costume. 😀
http://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/original_314643_xBm2LXEIsGOwkSaKv8IG5_yq1.jpg